Bill Maher Vs. Rush Limbaugh

[Horndog]

I've seen the comparisons going between Bill Maher and Rush Limbaugh. The comparisons have started after people started criticizing Rush Limbaugh for his comments regarding Georgetown University Law Center law student Sandra Fluke. Then Limbaugh supporters started criticizing Bill Maher for his comments on Sarah Palin and Michele Bachmann.

Can we all agree that both Limbaugh and Maher use sexist language for shock value? Is anyone really shocked?

[Diapered Jason]

Why don't you watch the two and see for yourself? Then take a quick look at what each does. One is a stand-up comedian and the other is a talk show radio host who speaks for the Republican party. One uses satire, the other does not. I welcome you to figure it out yourself as it is very easy to do. Just look them up on youtube.

[KittenAB]

One of the big differences is how they word their speaking as well. Rush is more comparable to Howard Stern really, Maher is a bit of a kook in life but on stage is really tame. There is no comparison between their performances because of the different audiences and genres they target and use, however, to their personal beliefs and attitudes off the air, Bill Maher is a pussycat compared to Rush hands down.

[Alexandra]

I personally can't stnd either of them but I do prefer Bill Maher over Rush Limbaugh who gives me magrines wrose than I can describe and I can boil the reason for that down to two simple things one is that as pointed out maher is not a politican he's a comedian and so any person with any sembalance of reasonable though will take his opinions as nothing more than that a joke but so many people willingly become Limaugh's sheep and suck up the crap he spews it makes me sick; and two from the little I've seen of Maher he doesn't attack groups but rather individuals and politicans who are voluntarely in the spotlight already but Limbaugh will attack anyone he deems wrothery of attacking.

[Horndog]

Why don't you watch the two and see for yourself? Then take a quick look at what each does. One is a stand-up comedian and the other is a talk show radio host who speaks for the Republican party. One uses satire, the other does not. I welcome you to figure it out yourself as it is very easy to do. Just look them up on youtube.

I watch Real Time with Bill Maher every Friday night when a new episode airs. Still, it's like, "Really?"

[BriGuy]

Rush is starting to look like Jabba The Hut. I hope he overdoses on OxyContin soon, that judgmental pig needs to get his ass whooped.

Bill on the other hand cracks me up. Although its sad when theres more truth in the things comedians say than what the "news" provides.

[WriteAndLeft]

What Rush said about Sandra Fluke was minor compared to the attacks on Michelle Backman and Sarah Palin. Rush does use satire a lot and you would know that if you listened to the show. Seriously, if you don't like Rush don't listen to him. Same with Bill Mahr. The worse thing we can do is advocate censorship.

[TBlazer]

What Rush said about Sandra Fluke was minor compared to the attacks on Michelle Backman and Sarah Palin. Rush does use satire a lot and you would know that if you listened to the show. Seriously, if you don't like Rush don't listen to him. Same with Bill Mahr. The worse thing we can do is advocate censorship.

Rushs words were not minor. Also, Maher is a comedian on premium cable, while Rush is beemed across the country through FM and AM radio that anyone can listen to. That is a big difference-one is associated with after hours adult entertainment while the other is mixed into mews and weather. All one has todo is look at the ansolutely moronic comments on news blogs by right wingers, who now believe the more sex you have the more birth control you take. Nor do they understand this isnt even about sex-Sandra Fluke was talking about the non sexual uses for hormone therapy. This a result of their ignorance, and for them Rushs words only validate them. The only times Rush is satirical is when its criticising republicans-his attacks on democrats are emotional and sincere, meant to destroy any critic of the right.

Frankly someone should put thos sweaty, closeted gay pig out to pasture, preferably along with the entire fox, cnn, and msnbc casts as well. They are all spineless jellyfish who seek to make money at the expense of our country's well being.

[redneck diaper boy]

I cancelled my HBO subscription because of that slimeball!

There is clearly a double standard here.

Bill Maher can call Sarah Palin a "dumb twat" and that is OK.

David Letterman can state that Sarah Palin has a "slutty look" and that is OK.

Letterman can attack Palin's children and that is OK

MSNBC's Ed Schultz can call Republicans "bastards" and that is OK

http://newsbusters.o...-american-dream

So where was the media when Ed Schultxz was calling Laura Ingram "a slut"?

I know the above is a blog but the video is there.

So when is Bristol Palin going to get a call from President Obama?

Limbaugh is not a journalist. Limbaugh is an entertainer who makes a good living exposing the progressive movement.

[Alexandra]

Ok enough both of these guys are pigs and offensive but as I and others have stated before the differnce between the two and what makes Rush so much more vile is that Bill is just an comedian Rush is politican and one who sadly many people follow like mindless sheep and Redneck Tu es stultior quam asinus of course all thoose vids, which I'm not going to waste the time watching and I'll just take your word they have offensive attacks in there, are bad and any political show or joke is not funny in my opinion however that does not lession Rush's crimes as it were he's still one of the wrost human beings on the face of the earth and no matter how many vids you find of other insults from differnt people that won't change the hatefill and hurtful bile spewing from limbaugh's mouth. so in short its not about what is said so much as who its said to and the audiance of Rush's show are voters who take his words as law

[Diaper Mike 05]

Alexandra, you are wrong, Rush is not a politician. Jason, Rush does not speak for the Republican Party. He just has a bigger voice and uses it (quite loudly, in fact), which is perceived as him being the leader of the party.

Rush was wrong to call Fluke a slut, he doesn't seem to have a grasp over alternative uses for birth control (I believe the right-wing talkers were equating birth control with contraception, such as condoms, etc., because that is the only way that mistake can be made without being dishonest about it). TBlazer is right - the way your comments are aired dictates on what levels you can take your comments to - Maher can get away with more because of being on HBO.

[Alexandra]

Ok rush isn't a politician but he is in the political system as a talkshow host and opinion commentator which was my main point people take his word to heart and based their political actions around his ridiculous opinion so your right he's not going to be running for office any time soon gods forbid but he's very.much a part of the system far more than bill is

[Leilin]

Alexandra, you are wrong, Rush is not a politician. Jason, Rush does not speak for the Republican Party. He just has a bigger voice and uses it (quite loudly, in fact), which is perceived as him being the leader of the party.

Rush is perceived as being the voice of the party... by the party, and that is the big difference between him and Maher. You won't see Maher speaking for the DNC anytime soon. Rush has for the RNC on several occasions.

[redneck diaper boy]

OK. Limbaugh is a conservative voice. That does not make him a Republican. My problem, with the Republican Party is they are far too liberal.

Ed Schultz is a Marxist nutcase radio talk-show host. Schultz is the progressive's answer to Rush Limbaugh but he has nowhere near the ratings of Limbaugh. Schultz's issue is the Democrats are far too conservative. Schultz called Republicans "bastards". Immagine the fallout if Limbaugh called Democrats "bastards"!

[Leilin]

http://mediamatters....tv/201003220049

I read your drivel out of sheer curiosity to see if you've changed in the last two weeks, RDB. Your cognitive dissonance is equally as silly as ever.

And your overuse of the word "Marxist" begins to dilute its already non-meaning when you use it to describe everybody who's black, gay, liberal, or has more than a third-grade education.

Limbaugh is a Republican. This is why he has spoken on several occasions for the RNC. You are not entitled to your own facts, no matter how often you decide to plug your ears and ignore the real ones.

Shultz, on the other hand, has spoken for the DNC how many times?

Oh, right. Zero. Keep trying to create a parallel where there is none and your allergy to facts keeps getting more and more obvious.

Back to ignore with you, little useless bigot. I'll check on you in another two weeks or so.

[Alexandra]

you know Redneck loves using that word so much maybe he's secretly a closet marxist himself

[Diapered Jason]

Alexandra, you are wrong, Rush is not a politician. Jason, Rush does not speak for the Republican Party. He just has a bigger voice and uses it (quite loudly, in fact), which is perceived as him being the leader of the party.

Really? Rush Limbaugh was a speaker at the RNC and was made an honorary member of the congressional class by Republicans in 1994. He excites the Republican base. When Republican politicians dare to go against him, I will agree with you. Unfortunately for you, that is not the case as Republicans fear going against him and would not even so much as repudiate Rush Limbaugh's comments about Sandra Fluke, and people, this goes far beyond the language used. Even John McCain cannot say anything negative about Rush Limbaugh, and I know John hates him. You better wake up, because he owns your party!

[Diapered Jason]

Public figures in politics or entertainment are fair game. It's very much a "can't stand the heat? Then get out of the kitchen" sort of situation. So if Rush wants to go after (for example) the Clintons, that's fine. Sandra is not a public figure and didn't ask for this, so Rush was a bit out of line on that one.

That is part of it, but not all of it. The problem is Rush Limbaugh made comments about all women in his 3-day tirade. Most women I have talked to about this are not disgusted so much by the foul language or the target chosen, but the things he said about all women (I don't want to say them, look them up yourself). That is why I think he is in trouble. Bill Maher's past transgression, which was just a few words about politicians, was just thrown out to distract us and was an attempt to justify their own actions, which is completely wrong people. I would quote the ethics of media, but no one would accept responsibility anyway.

[redneck diaper boy]

http://mediamatters....tv/201003220049

I read your drivel out of sheer curiosity to see if you've changed in the last two weeks, RDB. Your cognitive dissonance is equally as silly as ever.

And your overuse of the word "Marxist" begins to dilute its already non-meaning when you use it to describe everybody who's black, gay, liberal, or has more than a third-grade education.

Limbaugh is a Republican. This is why he has spoken on several occasions for the RNC. You are not entitled to your own facts, no matter how often you decide to plug your ears and ignore the real ones.

Shultz, on the other hand, has spoken for the DNC how many times?

Oh, right. Zero. Keep trying to create a parallel where there is none and your allergy to facts keeps getting more and more obvious.

Back to ignore with you, little useless bigot. I'll check on you in another two weeks or so.

Looks like Limbaugh said it. I stand corrected.

For the record, I agree with Limbaugh

[Diaper Mike 05]

Really? Rush Limbaugh was a speaker at the RNC and was made an honorary member of the congressional class by Republicans in 1994. He excites the Republican base. When Republican politicians dare to go against him, I will agree with you. Unfortunately for you, that is not the case as Republicans fear going against him and would not even so much as repudiate Rush Limbaugh's comments about Sandra Fluke, and people, this goes far beyond the language used. Even John McCain cannot say anything negative about Rush Limbaugh, and I know John hates him. You better wake up, because he owns your party!

I don't have a party, nice try. I'm registered as unaffiliated.

And when do they truly go with him? Rush doesn't have much love for a lot of the Republicans in Congress, doesn't see them as strong enough to go against Obama and the Democrats.

And I will have to find it, but Ed Schultz even said on his radio show either yesterday (Monday) or last Friday that he has no problem if Obamacare is unconstitutional, he hopes we move to socialized medicine. I can't remember the comment totally, but Schultz is close to outing himself as a Socialist.

And titular =/= actual.

[Leilin]

And titular =/= actual.

You're the only person who has used that word thus far, because he is not the titular head of the Republican party (that would be Reince Priebus) and he is a person who has spoken for the party, both as mouthpiece and as rally-head, on myriad occasions.

The fact remains that your parallel is improper due to the simple fact that Schultz doesn't have nearly as much pull with the DNC, as is evidenced both the fact that he is not offered the same accolades by them. The sooner you admit that, the sooner your "unaffiliated" stance becomes something other than a bland platitude of neutrality trying to disguise a truly partisan mentality. Your false equivocation makes you as much of a partisan as hacks like RDB in your own way because you simply refuse to acknowledge that a Republican can be worse than a particular left-leaning individual, despite clear and empirical evidence of their actions.

[Diaper Mike 05]

You're actually backwards on that but that's to be expected because Priebus isn't out there as much as Limbaugh (nor Steele, but he's known for the wrong reasons). I thought Michael Steele was the head of the RNC (who would be the actual head of the Republican Party). Limbaugh is an opinion leader and recognized (and admitted) conservative, which would get him speaking engagements for the Republican Party. And an honorary title in 1994 doesn't mean he is an actual politician. It just means he has been recognized for his loud, obnoxious voice for their side.

Schultz wouldn't be asked to speak for the DNC because he would make the party look bad. He would slip and start going on about this ideal Socialist agenda he would like see implemented. And my Schultz comment was really a separate thing that somewhat paralleled the topic of things people with media outlets are saying that are undesirable and stupid.

Secondly, to be a party hack I'd have to be arguing for the party instead of just pointing out gross errors. And it doesn't matter what you or anyone else thinks, it only matters what I say when I put my ballot in the ballot box in November and the PotUS spot will not be filled in next to the D or R because, quite honestly, both parties are just crap and I have other choices (I live in New York state, we haven't figured out electronic voting yet and use these ugly, antiquated machines where I haven't figured out how to write in a vote yet, but 2012 will be my second PotUS election in this state).

And until we can get a Democrat who can truly embrace true growth in manufacturing, they are the greater evil directly to me. I'm going to give my real life example. I have worked for one company run by a liberal and one run by a conservative. One (company #1) offered better pay, did things to the book, offered better benefits, and put me on a clear, forward moving path. The other has lousy pay, bad benefits (which thankfully they pay mostly for), derailed my career, and is stuck 50 years in the past. Company #1 was the one run by conservatives and the other, who I currently work for, is run by liberals.

And like I said, both sides are crap that are mostly just as bad as each other.

[Leilin]

And an honorary title in 1994 doesn't mean he is an actual politician. It just means he has been recognized for his loud, obnoxious voice for their side.

Uh. An honorary title from nearly 20 years ago makes him LESS the titular head than the guy who actually has the not honorary title right now.

Schultz wouldn't be asked to speak for the DNC because he would make the party look bad.

And Rush is asked to speak despite the fact that he makes the party look bad. Any questions?

Secondly, to be a party hack I'd have to be arguing for the party instead of just pointing out gross errors.

The fact that you are painting these situations as equal makes you a party hack. You are ignoring major facts to paint completely nonparallel situations as parallel, which directly means you are willing to let Republicans get away with more, which makes you a hack.

You have yet to point out any gross errors. Thus far, not a single one of your posts has stood up to facts.

[redneck diaper boy]

Uh. An honorary title from nearly 20 years ago makes him LESS the titular head than the guy who actually has the not honorary title right now.

And Rush is asked to speak despite the fact that he makes the party look bad. Any questions?

The fact that you are painting these situations as equal makes you a party hack. You are ignoring major facts to paint completely nonparallel situations as parallel, which directly means you are willing to let Republicans get away with more, which makes you a hack.

You have yet to point out any gross errors. Thus far, not a single one of your posts has stood up to facts.

Limbaugh isn't hurting at all! I really liked his speech to the CPAC back in 2009! The commie libs are loosing it! Keith Olbermann was fired by Algore's underground TV networt! When someone it too wacked out for Algore, they are really wacked out!

[Diaper Mike 05]

RDB, Olbermann is probably done in media because he has "left" under not so great circumstances from 3 major media players - Disney (ESPN), Fox (FOXSports), and NBC (MSNBC). Limbaugh isn't hurting the party right now, but he is a polarizing voice right now, which is hurting the country. I listen to both Limbaugh and Schultz for a short period of time on my lunch break, and both are sickening right now. Also RDB, even I can't take your contribution to the debate seriously because of your liberal (no pun intended) use of "Marxist" and "Communist" to describe Obama.

Leilin, you're blinded too much by your liberal beliefs that you take anything that you don't agree with as being wrong and anyone who doesn't agree with you as a Republican hack. You actually haven't proven I have ignored facts. You also haven't proven I'm willing to let anyone get away with more. If you reread, I called Limbaugh "obnoxious and loud" and gave Maher more leeway because he is on latenight cable instead of broadcast over the air during the day. If anything, because of the outlet, I'm letting Maher get away with more.

RDB, I'm going to give you a chance to show you can add something positive to this thread. What is it that has the right all worked up about Sandra Fluke wanting birth control covered under her school's insurance? I have a theory, but I want to see what someone farther right has to say and see if maybe my theory is correct (which, my theory would be more correct based on a "wrong answer" given here, LOL).

And I think I found my 2016 candidate (and someone I would break one of my general voting rules for) - Andrew Cuomo.